bdeebs wrote:Why does he need to do that? Just because a task is not difficult does not mean that it should be performed. Punching a stranger in the face would normally be a physically simple task, but many people choose not to do it for other more meaningful reasons.

Well to get me and ppl like me to stop wondering about his scores he has to release them. But like I mentioned earlier he really doesn't have to care what I think or anyone else does. But most con men need to feel like they've tricked everyone or they won't feel like the con is complete; its actually really sad.

Also your analogy is not fully compatible to this situation. I never said he has to do it because its simple. I said if he wants the doubts to stop there is a simple way of stopping it.

Not only do you think he should provide his IRR so "people like you can stop wondering about his scores", but you also have the balls to imply he is a con man, as if that will make him more inclined to appease your request.

No, you are right. We should take everything that is said on the internet at face value. Especially when there is profit motive involved.

bdeebs wrote:Why does he need to do that? Just because a task is not difficult does not mean that it should be performed. Punching a stranger in the face would normally be a physically simple task, but many people choose not to do it for other more meaningful reasons.

Well to get me and ppl like me to stop wondering about his scores he has to release them. But like I mentioned earlier he really doesn't have to care what I think or anyone else does. But most con men need to feel like they've tricked everyone or they won't feel like the con is complete; its actually really sad.

Also your analogy is not fully compatible to this situation. I never said he has to do it because its simple. I said if he wants the doubts to stop there is a simple way of stopping it.

Not only do you think he should provide his IRR so "people like you can stop wondering about his scores", but you also have the balls to imply he is a con man, as if that will make him more inclined to appease your request.

No, you are right. We should take everything that is said on the internet at face value. Especially when there is profit motive involved.

Thanks for misconstruing what I said. He is providing FREE advice. Not once in that thread has he suggested someone should go sign up for Velocity. He provides answers to questions, just like many others do. Are you going to require IRR's for everyone who has ever provided free advice on the LSAT forum? What he is doing is no worse then users who have the name of their company in their username when providing advice.

bruss wrote:Not only do you think he should provide his IRR so "people like you can stop wondering about his scores", but you also have the balls to imply he is a con man, as if that will make him more inclined to appease your request.

No, you are right. We should take everything that is said on the internet at face value. Especially when there is profit motive involved.

Thanks for misconstruing what I said. He is providing FREE advice. Not once in that thread has he suggested someone should go sign up for Velocity. He provides answers to questions, just like many others do. Are you going to require IRR's for everyone who has ever provided free advice on the LSAT forum? What he is doing is no worse then users who have the name of their company in their username when providing advice.

Really? I misconstrued what you said? How did I do that? You implied it was absurd to be skeptical of claims people make while posting on here. That is, frankly, really stupid.

You are correct that what he does is no worse than many users who have their company names in their profiles who come here to answer questions. However there have been questions raised about his scores and rather than post the IRR's, he posted a lot of text and e-mails and other things to try to prove that he isn't lying....it seems he will take the time to post everything but the IRR's.

As to it being free advice, well, yes it is. But his courses aren't free. And I notice that nobody knew what Velocity was before he started posting here, now suddenly people talk about it all the time. I wonder if he came here because he wanted to really help the low income and common people on TLS, or if he was actually interested in making money. Hmm. Gee, I just don't know.

Regardless, I don't really care whether he is lying or not. I just find it interesting, and somewhat funny, how randomly TLS'ers decide to viciously attack someone v. circle the wagons around someone. It really seems based on little more than how much one identifies with the given poster as opposed to what they are actually saying.

Really? I misconstrued what you said? How did I do that? You implied it was absurd to be skeptical of claims people make while posting on here. That is, frankly, really stupid.

You are correct that what he does is no worse than many users who have their company names in their profiles who come here to answer questions. However there have been questions raised about his scores and rather than post the IRR's, he posted a lot of text and e-mails and other things to try to prove that he isn't lying....it seems he will take the time to post everything but the IRR's.

As to it being free advice, well, yes it is. But his courses aren't free. And I notice that nobody knew what Velocity was before he started posting here, now suddenly people talk about it all the time. I wonder if he came here because he wanted to really help the low income and common people on TLS, or if he was actually interested in making money. Hmm. Gee, I just don't know.

Regardless, I don't really care whether he is lying or not. I just find it interesting, and somewhat funny, how randomly TLS'ers decide to viciously attack someone v. circle the wagons around someone. It really seems based on little more than how much one identifies with the given poster as opposed to what they are actually saying.

I don't think it was so random. It was a bunch of random accounts who had no post history. Probably a coordinated attack by someone who had an interest in doing so.

Really? I misconstrued what you said? How did I do that? You implied it was absurd to be skeptical of claims people make while posting on here. That is, frankly, really stupid.

You are correct that what he does is no worse than many users who have their company names in their profiles who come here to answer questions. However there have been questions raised about his scores and rather than post the IRR's, he posted a lot of text and e-mails and other things to try to prove that he isn't lying....it seems he will take the time to post everything but the IRR's.

As to it being free advice, well, yes it is. But his courses aren't free. And I notice that nobody knew what Velocity was before he started posting here, now suddenly people talk about it all the time. I wonder if he came here because he wanted to really help the low income and common people on TLS, or if he was actually interested in making money. Hmm. Gee, I just don't know.

Regardless, I don't really care whether he is lying or not. I just find it interesting, and somewhat funny, how randomly TLS'ers decide to viciously attack someone v. circle the wagons around someone. It really seems based on little more than how much one identifies with the given poster as opposed to what they are actually saying.

I don't think it was so random. It was a bunch of random accounts who had no post history. Probably a coordinated attack by someone who had an interest in doing so.

Let me get this straight:

You were under the impression (as a lot of people were) that Dave scored 3 180's in a row. You find out he didn't. Your response is to....attack those who criticized him and speculate about motives that you have no way of knowing?

This is what I mean about vicious attacks v. circling the wagons. People here have a bit of a hivemind mentality and seem to defend or attack someone based not on the objective criteria, but rather whether they view that person favorably or not.

Anyhow, I don't really care who the new accounts are. They, at the very least, showed Dave to be misleading people with his claims. If LSChick's data is accurate, it shows that Dave did not actually score a 180. Whether they've posted here for 6 days, 6 months, or 6 years is largely irrelevant.

Nikrall wrote:You are correct that what he does is no worse than many users who have their company names in their profiles who come here to answer questions. However there have been questions raised about his scores and rather than post the IRR's, he posted a lot of text and e-mails and other things to try to prove that he isn't lying....it seems he will take the time to post everything but the IRR's.

As to it being free advice, well, yes it is. But his courses aren't free. And I notice that nobody knew what Velocity was before he started posting here, now suddenly people talk about it all the time. I wonder if he came here because he wanted to really help the low income and common people on TLS, or if he was actually interested in making money. Hmm. Gee, I just don't know.

Regardless, I don't really care whether he is lying or not. I just find it interesting, and somewhat funny, how randomly TLS'ers decide to viciously attack someone v. circle the wagons around someone. It really seems based on little more than how much one identifies with the given poster as opposed to what they are actually saying.

It is erroneous on your part to suggest what I was implying. What my post was suggesting was that Dave Hall probably is not concerned with making sure the doubts of a select few are eliminated. What I found even more puzzling about his post was the fact that he would call someone a conman while expecting that same person to address his doubts. It just didn't make sense to me that someone would insult a person, but then ask something from the person after insulting them.

When someone signs up for a Powerscore or TM course they are usually not shown any proof that the instructor scored in the 99th percentile, something that both company say is required in anyone who teaches their course. We are simply trusting that those companies follow through on their claims. It is on the part of the buyer to do their due diligence before paying for a prep course. I am under the impression that when someone signs up for ANY prep course they are signing up based on research or the advice of people they trust, not solely on the fact that the instructor scored three 180s in a row or scored in the 99th percentile. So like you, I don't care if he is lying or not. His thread speaks for itself when it comes to displaying his ability to teach the LSAT, not his claim of scoring three 180s.

This isn't simply a team Dave vs everyone else matter for me. I'd just hate to see the doubts of a select few drive a great resource away from TLS. That's my angle.

Geetar Man wrote: I highly doubt that Dave would doctor the screen shot to prove such a thing. It be perfectly fine if he only scored 2 180s, since even by doing that is a remarkable achievment.

But how do you know he got any 180s, or even the 177s? Because he posted what he claims is a screenshot from his LSAC account? The one that doesn't even have his name on it? The only thing we know for sure about Dave's anonymous "screenshot" is that it doesn't square with the LSAC's data.

There is no evidence of what Dave's LSAT scores really are. There's only evidence of what they're not. And if he lied about getting one 180, you don't think he'd lie about the other two?

It's surprising how many gullible people there are on this forum. I've got the deed to the Golden Gate Bridge if you're interested in buying it. Sure, it's written in crayon, but I promise it's 100% authentic. No one would ever lie to make a buck, right?

There's nothing that he could offer that would really be proof. He could post a screen shot of his score report, but that's just as easily manipulated as his LSAC history which you seem to think is worthless. Do you think Dave got it from someone else? Then presumably he could get a score report from that person. Do you think he forged it? Then presumably he could just forge a score report.

But it just doesn't make sense to assume that's what he did. His explanation is plausible, if not rock solid. If he wanted to fake a score report, why the hell would he fake a 180-177-180-177-180?

Nikrall wrote:You are correct that what he does is no worse than many users who have their company names in their profiles who come here to answer questions. However there have been questions raised about his scores and rather than post the IRR's, he posted a lot of text and e-mails and other things to try to prove that he isn't lying....it seems he will take the time to post everything but the IRR's.

As to it being free advice, well, yes it is. But his courses aren't free. And I notice that nobody knew what Velocity was before he started posting here, now suddenly people talk about it all the time. I wonder if he came here because he wanted to really help the low income and common people on TLS, or if he was actually interested in making money. Hmm. Gee, I just don't know.

Regardless, I don't really care whether he is lying or not. I just find it interesting, and somewhat funny, how randomly TLS'ers decide to viciously attack someone v. circle the wagons around someone. It really seems based on little more than how much one identifies with the given poster as opposed to what they are actually saying.

It is erroneous on your part to suggest what I was implying. What my post was suggesting was that Dave Hall probably is not concerned with making sure the doubts of a select few are eliminated. What I found even more puzzling about his post was the fact that he would call someone a conman while expecting that same person to address his doubts. It just didn't make sense to me that someone would insult a person, but then ask something from the person after insulting them.

When someone signs up for a Powerscore or TM course they are usually not shown any proof that the instructor scored in the 99th percentile, something that both company say is required in anyone who teaches their course.

We are simply trusting that those companies follow through on their claims. It is on the part of the buyer to do their due diligence before paying for a prep course. I am under the impression that when someone signs up for ANY prep course they are signing up based on research or the advice of people they trust, not solely on the fact that the instructor scored three 180s in a row or scored in the 99th percentile. So like you, I don't care if he is lying or not. His thread speaks for itself when it comes to displaying his ability to teach the LSAT, not his claim of scoring three 180s.

This isn't simply a team Dave vs everyone else matter for me. I'd just hate to see the doubts of a select few drive a great resource away from TLS. That's my angle.

The facts you are assuming and reasoning from are somewhat incorrect and your reasoning is flawed.

You can view the full IRR report of every teacher/tutor currently working for them. Please get your facts straight before you make claims and form conclusions.

Hopefully to preempt a false accusation in a reply from you, NO, I am not an employee of Testmasters.

This matter about Mr. Hall has to do with ethics, honesty and truth.

Enough evidence that proves beyond the legal standards of preponderance of the evidence, clear and convincing evidence, and even possibly beyond a reasonable doubt have been presented to prove that he has made false claims in order to promote/market his online for profit service.

False advertising is illegal, even on discussion boards. There are several state and Federal laws and regulations that prohibit such practices.

Compare the dates in the column "Score E-mail Date" in the screen shot he posted--LinkRemoved--

Granted, some of his advice has been decent. However, most of it I've read has been superficial and glib, mainly stuff about LSAT 101 basics including a lot of stuff about pattern recognition regarding learning what the LR question types are. Learning what the question types are is just the beginning and is nothing magical.

He may be very enthusiastic in a way that entertains people in order to try to get them excited about studying for the test and to do the homework. It might make the videos and/or his classes more entertaining, however, that doesn't make him an LSAT messiah, especially given his dishonesty. I don't care how smart a person is or seems to be if they are deceptive and dishonest.

Some of the most successful con-men and criminals in known history have been extremely intelligent, but also very deceptive in order to get what they seek.

Going to law school is about becoming a Lawyer, not a liar. The law/legal systems in civilized countries are about determining the truth and casting judgment based on the proven to be true facts.

Prove it up Dave Hall, IRR report please since you are using your score claims as a marketing ploy.

.

Last edited by Jeffort on Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:21 am, edited 2 times in total.

No, I just don't like people that tell lies to prey on and make $$ off of anxiety filled LSAT students. There are plenty of ethically challenged people like that out there that come and go every year.

BTW, Daves defense regarding the repeater score data charts posted by somebody else in this and the other thread about his score not being included is silly. It doesn't even pass the sniff for BS test. LSAC does not exclude a score from the repeater stats because a temporary hold was placed on release of a score. Once the hold issue is resolved the score is released to the test taker within typically less than two weeks of when scores are released.

suspicious android wrote:There's nothing that he could offer that would really be proof. He could post a screen shot of his score report, but that's just as easily manipulated as his LSAC history which you seem to think is worthless. Do you think Dave got it from someone else? Then presumably he could get a score report from that person. Do you think he forged it? Then presumably he could just forge a score report.

But it just doesn't make sense to assume that's what he did. His explanation is plausible, if not rock solid. If he wanted to fake a score report, why the hell would he fake a 180-177-180-177-180?

I think you are confusing doctored vs unofficial. We just want to see his official IRR, and then we will stop, well I will at least. I'm not gonna cry out that its doctored unless I see compelling evidence showing that it is. Your assumption that I won't be satisfied by him showing it is wrong.

As to why he would fake getting those exact numbers, I don't know. But what I do know is that its unofficial. What I also know is that he has spent a lot of time trying to convince us that he is telling the truth yet he can't do a simple task of logging into his account.

As for his email convo I noticed it had lsac info so I will take that as evidence for his defense, but lsac did not say they are going to hold his score therefore they are going to keep him out of the repeater data. So all that e-mail proves is that he got a hold. Hell they might've through his Damn score out for all we know but Dave seems hell bent on not letting us know the truth.

This document, published by the LSAC, shows repeater data for the June 2009, September 2009, December 2009, and February 2010 LSAT administrations. During that time period, only one test-taker with a 177 took the test subsequently. Whoever that person was scored a 173. So Dave's claim that he scored a 177 on the June 2009 LSAT and then scored a 180 on the September 2009 LSAT is categorically FALSE.

In 2009, a temporary hold was placed on my score. Obviously, LSAC does not report scores when a hold is in place, nor do they include that held score in their data.

Here's a copy (LinkRemoved) of the email they sent me in lieu of a score immediately following that test (I've included an entire emailed conversation between me and a colleague - I've redacted her info for obvious reasons)

Jeffort wrote:Compare the dates in the column "Score E-mail Date" in the screen shot he posted--LinkRemoved--

His first 180 doesn't add up to the actual release date of the lsat, but it does add up to the official release date which means he tried to deceive.his first 177 doesn't add up to the actual releas date of the lsat, but it does add up to the official release date which means he tried to deceive.His second 180 doesn't add up to the actual release date of the lsat, but it does add up to the official release date which means he tried to deceive.

His second 177 ADDS UP to the actual release date which shows that IF his unofficial doc is true that he was the person who repeated got a 173.

The email says he got a hold on his test for September 2009 (where he supposedly received his 3rd 180) yet on his unofficial report he got his score right on time like Oct 16. So I guess they held your score for a second, then said never mind? but they couldnt have released your score or else why would you write to Sheena on OCT 23 2009 whining about how they put a hold on your score when your score was released to you on OCT 16.

Last edited by bruss on Thu Feb 02, 2012 1:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Nikrall wrote:You are correct that what he does is no worse than many users who have their company names in their profiles who come here to answer questions. However there have been questions raised about his scores and rather than post the IRR's, he posted a lot of text and e-mails and other things to try to prove that he isn't lying....it seems he will take the time to post everything but the IRR's.

As to it being free advice, well, yes it is. But his courses aren't free. And I notice that nobody knew what Velocity was before he started posting here, now suddenly people talk about it all the time. I wonder if he came here because he wanted to really help the low income and common people on TLS, or if he was actually interested in making money. Hmm. Gee, I just don't know.

Regardless, I don't really care whether he is lying or not. I just find it interesting, and somewhat funny, how randomly TLS'ers decide to viciously attack someone v. circle the wagons around someone. It really seems based on little more than how much one identifies with the given poster as opposed to what they are actually saying.

It is erroneous on your part to suggest what I was implying. What my post was suggesting was that Dave Hall probably is not concerned with making sure the doubts of a select few are eliminated. What I found even more puzzling about his post was the fact that he would call someone a conman while expecting that same person to address his doubts. It just didn't make sense to me that someone would insult a person, but then ask something from the person after insulting them.

When someone signs up for a Powerscore or TM course they are usually not shown any proof that the instructor scored in the 99th percentile, something that both company say is required in anyone who teaches their course. We are simply trusting that those companies follow through on their claims. It is on the part of the buyer to do their due diligence before paying for a prep course. I am under the impression that when someone signs up for ANY prep course they are signing up based on research or the advice of people they trust, not solely on the fact that the instructor scored three 180s in a row or scored in the 99th percentile. So like you, I don't care if he is lying or not. His thread speaks for itself when it comes to displaying his ability to teach the LSAT, not his claim of scoring three 180s.

This isn't simply a team Dave vs everyone else matter for me. I'd just hate to see the doubts of a select few drive a great resource away from TLS. That's my angle.

You don't seem to understand how real life works. Dave Hall posts on TLS to advertise his business. This should be fairly obvious. As such he has a direct economic interest in how his business is seen. He has an economic interest in responding to charges that he is a "con man". That he has spent a great deal of time responding to the charges, without bothering to respond in the manner originally requested seems strange to me. Why spend time posting random e-mails about a hold that shows absolutely nothing instead of just posting the IRR?

Dave claimed he got 3 180's BEFORE he was well known on these boards. His claim is why people treated him seriously, asked him questions, and then listened to the response. A high score shouldn't be the only criteria for teaching the test, but it is clearly a criteria and one that people take very seriously.

Nikrall wrote:Dave claimed he got 3 180's BEFORE he was well known on these boards. His claim is why people treated him seriously, asked him questions, and then listened to the response. A high score shouldn't be the only criteria for teaching the test, but it is clearly a criteria and one that people take very seriously.

This is the point. DH is credible to many because we all thought he got the 180's.

I wonder how helpful Dave's advice really is and how much of it is placebo effect. Omg, this guy who got 3 180's is giving me a strategy to use for logic games, therefore his strategy must be good, therefore because I think it's good, I try really hard on logic games and therefore get a better score and therefore attribute it to Dave's strategy instead of my own hard work

InGoodFaith wrote:As opposed to spending hours researching an LSAT tutor and railing on him for possibly lying about his scores and profiting off of them.

FTFY.

I'm not sure if you are just stupid or willfully blind. But Dave has a clear and obvious economic motive. It took him...2 hours from his original post to give a link to his company. Which, in case you were wondering, does charge and is not free.

Edit: PS...spending hours researching is also pretty essential to law school.